well, we have google, youtube, akamai, netflix caches so they say it is better to have a pool of caches like this providers do, they say the cost of search an asset in a huge (10GB or so) cache is not better than search it from the internet itself, i have not seen numbers that prove this but they say "the exerts at google knows better"
On Fri, Mar 4, 2016 at 9:53 AM, A. Schulze via Unbound-users < [email protected]> wrote: > > Miguel Miranda via Unbound-users: > > > Hello to all, im installing a load balancer and i want to run multiple >> unbound instances, im doing this because my it experts says it is not >> recommended to have a huge cache (i have 32GB available) it is better to >> have 2 or 3 GB cache in multiple unbound instances, this is good for high >> availability too, so if a instances dies the balancer notices it and the >> other instances take the load, what do you think about it ? if this a is >> a good idea, how to run multiple unbound instances, i am running unbound >> 1.5.1 Centos 6.7. >> regards. >> > > running multiple instances is possible - I do so. > But because of different configurations. > > could your "it experts" prove the statement > "it is not recommended to have a huge cache" > somehow? > > Andreas > >
